$SOL 【China Wuhan 660,000 Yuan Virtual Currency Theft Case Retrial Reverses Verdict: Theft Amount Based on Actual Cost Paid by Victim, Main Offender Sentenced to Ten Years and Six Months in Prison】

According to the "Procuratorial Daily," Lin, Zeng, and Dai conspired in advance to use the pretext of trading virtual currency, during which they secretly photographed the victim's digital wallet private key, and after the virtual currency was credited, secretly logged into the victim's wallet to revoke the transaction, transferring the relevant virtual currency back to their controlled accounts. The three committed the crime three times in succession, causing the victim an economic loss totaling 660,000 yuan. The first-instance court believed that, in the absence of clear judicial interpretations regarding the calculation method of virtual currency value and sentencing standards, it was not appropriate to directly determine the involved amount as particularly large based on the victim's purchase amount of 660,000 yuan, and therefore sentenced the three individuals based on other serious circumstances, with sentences ranging from eight years to five years and six months in prison, and fines. The Hubei Province Wuhan City Hanyang District Procuratorate subsequently filed an appeal, which was supported by the Wuhan City Procuratorate. The prosecution argued that the first-instance court erred in the application of law and imposed an excessively light sentence. Prosecutor Dai Wentao of Wuhan City Procuratorate stated that, given the clear amount of loss available for reference, the court's conclusion that the value of virtual currency could not be determined was logically contradictory and a legal error. In judicial practice, recognizing the theft amount based on the price of stolen goods or transaction price has become mainstream; using the actual cost paid by the victim to determine the value of virtual currency has factual, legal, and practical basis. The Intermediate Court of Wuhan City adopted the prosecution's opinion in the second trial, revoked the original judgment's relevant content, and changed the determination to a particularly large theft amount, sentencing the main offender Lin to ten years and six months in prison for theft, and sentencing accomplices Zeng and Dai to eight years in prison, each with fines.